Comments by "" (@resir9807) on "Charisma on Command"
channel.
-
1200
-
119
-
114
-
59
-
52
-
38
-
I feel like this is just confirming my theory that all charisma advice is approaching singularity, or in other words, useless.
If you take a look at this channel over the years (and I might be remembering wrong), it started out with "speak like this" and "move like this" and "don't do that". The more Charlie progressed, the more it turned into "think like this", "adopt this mindset" and "handle your emotions like this". The rationale was that ultimately, most of what you physically communicate happens at a subconscious level, and so if you shape your subconscious the right way, you will automatically act charismatically.
Now, in real life, you will observe insanely charismatic people that don't know a single thing about where to put your hands when you speak, or how to walk into a room. That's because this is the charisma singularity: confidence. None of this "move your hands like that" knowledge matters, because a confident subconscious knows to act it out, because how a confident person acts is what DEFINES charisma. It's like trying to fix all the parts of your car that keep getting totaled instead of switching out the terrible driver.
31
-
21
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
10
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@dragonsreingsupreme1 not only do I know what it stands for, I very likely can pronounce Nazionalsozialist better than you, being austrian and whatnot. Are you trying to explain to me that not only has the term not drastically changed over decades, but also that hitler's followers named themselves accurately instead of trying to pander to the populous? Do you know what Hitler said on this topic? “Socialism is Marxism pure and simple. You see, the great mass of workers only wants bread and circuses. Ideas are not accessible to them and we cannot hope to win them over. We attach ourselves to the fringe, the race of lords, which did not grow through a miserabilist doctrine and knows by the virtue of its own character that it is called to rule, and rule without weakness over the masses of beings.” As you can see, he didn't care about policy, just about the public's opinion. He forbid Nazi trade unions and said that distributing private property woul “end all progress of humanity.”
Dude, i was educated in a country that was part of germany during the nazi regime. your adventures on youtube don't match hundreds of hours spent studying this topic. And I "failed" so badly, I never got anything less than a 1 (an A in america) on every single test.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
@Oswald_Thatendswald Well you have to consider that mainstream media (the one funded by bloomberg etc) is held to a higher standard by society. Meaning, if the New Yorker gets something wrong or seems to mislead, then there will be tens of millions of people calling them out on in, researchers and academics all across america protesting. The New Yorker knows this, and they know that if they slip up even one but, they get hell for it.
Do you know who holds steven accountable? teenagers who don't understand politics or data and other ideologues like himself.
Also, it is always possible to just check the data YOURSELF. Even if CNN publishes the most misleading and biased article, an academic can easily check the sources and determine its validity. Well turns, surprise, that CNN publishes WAY more scientifically accurate pieces than Steven crowder, because if you follow HIS sources with statistical understanding, you end up AGHAST. I currently have a course at university which specifically focuses on scientific research, but if you don't want to take it from me just watch some three arrows.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Crowder is a right-wing ideologue whose sole purpose is to indoctrinate teens into a conservative narrative. He's receiving millions from conservative billionaires like the Koch brother, which is the major reason he still even exists on youtube. He never actually ever plans to change his mind, just to do whatever daddy says so that the money keeps coming in.
Also, watch some of his podcast. Like, does this really, REALLY strike you, of all things, a KIND person?
And everything about steven is pseudo-intellectual. He cherrypicks data, coming to opposite conclusions of studies he cites, misinterprets history and paints himself as "research-oriented". If you don't believe me, check out three arrows' videos on him.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@arxci9402 Arxci how interesting that i see it the other way around!
First off, I'm european, so my political lense isn't really "left" and "right".
Second, being all about "facts" is a narrative the right has spun for themselves. It's a lot easier said than done. Sociology is a highly complex topic which requires scientific literacy a certain understanding of statistics to form a valid opinion on. The likes of ben shapiro, steven crowder, dave rubin are the height of sophistry and they hate facts, but they sure LOVE big donor money.
Just take crowder's claims on transgenderism for example. They're not just scientifically false, the very studies he cites contradict his own conclusion, because he cherrypicks the data. Watch three arrows, shaun, vaush, any if these to debunk crowder. You don't have to be a leftist to understand how fraudulent these "fact-lovers" are.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Fact: Islam is wrong My friend, you genuinely amuse me. To discard the model of one political axis with the claim that the one with two axes is truly legitimate is hilarious to me, and suggests a shallow understanding of politics to me.
Let me tell you a secret: they're both just crude models and useful in different contexts.
Now, we can argue about technical definitions to no end (which shift across time and space), so to me the interesting question is WHY Nazis are being called socialist.
You may notice that it is only right wingers who do this. The goal is to liken the nazi regime to modern socialist movements in order to discredit them. As long as you see how modern socialist movements have pretty much nothing in common with nazis, you can call them whatever you want, potayto potahto. Notice that whether or not we call nazis socialist is completely irrelevant, as these political terms are too complex to narrow down in practice.
Political understanding is not about how well you can apply umbrella terms like "socialism", "corporatism" or "fascism", but rather in-depth and multifacetted knowledge of specific policies and how they interact together. And when you look at the individual policies of the nazis and apprehend their intentions, you can see that comparing them to Fidel Castro or Venezuela or (idiotically) bernie sanders is useless.
1
-
1
-
1